Secondary Logo

Institutional members access full text with Ovid®

Share this article on:

Ultrasonography, Computed Tomography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Diagnosis and Determining Resectability of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A Meta-Analysis

Bipat, Shandra MSc*; Phoa, Saffire S. K. S MD, PhD*; van Delden, Otto M MD, PhD*; Bossuyt, Patrick M M PhD; Gouma, Dirk J MD, PhD; Laméris, Johan S MD, PhD*; Stoker, Jaap MD, PhD*

Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography: July-August 2005 - Volume 29 - Issue 4 - p 438-445
doi: 10.1097/01.rct.0000164513.23407.b3
Abdominal Imaging: Original Article

Objective: To compare ultrasonography (US), computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the diagnosis and determination of resectability of pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Methods: Articles reporting US, CT, or MRI data of patients with known or suspected pancreatic adenocarcinoma and at least 20 patients verified with histopathology, surgical findings, or follow-up were included. A bivariate random effects approach was used to calculate sensitivity and specificity for diagnosis and resectability of pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Results: Sixty-eight articles fulfilled all inclusion criteria. For diagnosis, sensitivities of helical CT, conventional CT, MRI, and US were 91%, 86%, 84%, and 76% and specificities were 85%, 79%, 82%, and 75% respectively. Sensitivities for MRI and US were significantly lower compared with helical CT (P = 0.04 and P = 0.0001). For determining resectability, sensitivities of helical CT, conventional CT, MRI, and US were 81%, 82%, 82, and 83% and specificities were 82%, 76%, 78%, and 63% respectively. Specificity of US was significantly lower compared with helical CT (P = 0.011).

Conclusions: Helical CT is preferable as an imaging modality for the diagnosis and determination of resectability of pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

From the *Department of Radiology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; †Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; and ‡Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Received for publication January 4, 2005; accepted March 23, 2005.

Reprints: Shandra Bipat, Department of Radiology, Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, 1105AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands (e-mail: s.bipat@amc.uva.nl).

© 2005 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.